If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

Is it possible for us to discuss these "ics" and "isms" as they relate to beekeeping? I'd like to know the differing viewpoints and the implications to our beekeeping. A post by Adam Finkelstein prompted this thread.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

Originally Posted by Barry

Is it possible for us to discuss these "ics" and "isms" as they relate to beekeeping? ...

IMHO the question before us is, or at least the question should be, “Are we all adult enough here that we won’t need a virtual sling for our bruised and battered noses once our pet theories and long held cherished beliefs gets refuted in too factual of a way?”

Scrapfe---Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.--Otto von Bismarck.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

Originally Posted by Barry

Is it possible for us to discuss these "ics" and "isms" as they relate to beekeeping? I'd like to know the differing viewpoints and the implications to our beekeeping. A post by Adam Finkelstein prompted this thread.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

Solomon,
Maybe you didn't get any replys to your Thread because there aren't very many TreatmentFree beekeepers who know enough to respond or not enough of them wanted to read what Randy Oliver wrote and what you presented and then get into a discussion about it.

I look into the Thread, didn't bother to read Randy Oliver's epistel or much of what you presented because I didn't think I should Post my opinions since I treat, but mostly because I don't know enough.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

I don't know enough about the comparisons between these three theories to be dangerous. But from the little heart to heart talk I had with Webster at 2:00 PM today,

Epigenist (I think) refers more TOWARDS the creationism side of genetics or where something (like a trait) did not exist before in nature but now it exists, perhaps in response to some outside force like the environment????

Lamarckism (I think) is a school of genetics that on the fringes would seem to suggest that if you keep cutting the left foot off every baby born, that soon every baby born would come into this world minus his left foot. Notice I said on the fringes.

Mendelism (I think) is the old new school of genetics that came into vogue around 1900 and that we all grew up with in middle school. Mendelism is concerned with genes, chromosomes, pea vines, and all that other sexy stuff.

Scrapfe---Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.--Otto von Bismarck.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

I guess I'll bite on this one.
Mendelism
Start with the easiest one, I'm not teachign a class here so just the jist of each. Gregor Mendel did a bunch of studies on inheritance ( a lot with pea plants) to try and figure out how traits where passed down from parent to offspring. I came up with a couple of rules based on observation. Basically he said that each individual has two copies of each gene (called them factors) from their parents. These copies could be different forms (called them alleles think brown hair or blonde hair, both copies of a gene for hair color). One version would be dominant and cover up the recessive (if you had a brown and blonde gene the brown gene might cover up the blonde). During gamete (sex cells sperm/egg, pollen/ova, etc) formation these alleles would split apart and one copy would go to each gamete, independent of the others. This is what we would term as "normal" inheritance type.

So basically you have two copies of every gene and your kids get one of those copies so they have half of your genes and half of your spouses.
Of course we've known for some time now that he got lucky with the traits he chose and it's usually/often more complicated than that. Traits are inherited together sometimes if on the same chromosome, there's different types of dominance, and traits are affected by more than one gene etc, etc.

Lemarckism - Sooo a formerly debunked method of inheritance that is gaining crede with newer molecular genetics. Basically Lemarck said that as you lived your life you adapted and changed and those changes that occurred could be inherited. So if you lived in the far north and you needed to stay warm you got fatter or hairier or whatever. Your kids would then be fatter or hairier etc. He was debunked originally because there were lots of holes in the theory, if you lost an arm would your kid be born without an arm etc?

Epigenetics - toughest one to understand so I'll do by best. Think of your body as a whole and all of the types of cells that you have. Each of those cells has the same DNA (that's why the cops can ID you off a blood stain, hair folicle, skin, or whatever they find), but all the cells are different. Each cell in your body has the code for every possible protein that you need to make, the difference between each cell is which ones they actually make. In a muscle cell the genes for actin and myosin are turned on (that's the proteins your muscles are made of), in your pancrease the gene for insulin is on. You muscle cell has that gene, but it's not using it. Turning genes on and off is a complicated process, the DNA needs to be opened up, and a bunch of primers and regulatory proteins added etc. It is possible to change both whether or not a particular gene is turned on, or how fast it is working (Think type II diabetics, they have the gene for insulin, but arn't making enough of it). Epigenetics is environmental factors (hormone levels, temperature, diet, the whole nine yards) effect on the regulation of genes. We do this all the time, we eat a sugary snack, sugar enters our bloodstream is detected, our pancrease makes more insulin. That's the upregulation of a gene. What is new in the field is that we are starting to realize that sometimes these chagnes are semipermanent and sometimes also inheritable. Not all epigentics is inheritable, but we are learning that some is and quite frankly its pretty fascinating/scary to think about.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

Originally Posted by psfred

What would there be to discuss?

We know how genetics works, it's not a mystery.

Peter

Except epigenetics doesn't work the same at all. It has more to do with changes in gene expression caused by environment. For example improvements in nutrition and natal/prenatal care have caused humans to become inherit-ably taller/larger in just a few generations. Not long ago Americans were the tallest people in the world on average, but now the Northern European people are (I think) - without any genetic changes.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

Originally Posted by sqkcrk

didn't bother to read Randy Oliver's epistel

The funny thing is the sheer number of people who don't even take the time to click the link and discover that it is actually audio. It's amazing that a text based forum would have such an aversion to reading even when reading is not necessary.

Originally Posted by sqkcrk

Is this you being funny?

No, always serious as you have been informed. Sorry, I guess you're still mad at me. Just trying to help.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

Not sure what this has to do with queen bee breeding in the north versus the south, or what if anything it has to do with migratory beekeeping, or even treatment free beekeeping. I'll leave it up to you to create a link out of whole cloth.

The only trait that I am aware of that can be called an Epigenetic trait is (IMHO) not an Epigenetic or any other inherited trait. The trait I am speaking of is the dormant or rest period wheat seeds need before germination can begin. Dr. Norman Borlaug discovered that if he moved his newly harvested wheat seed up or down in elevation or back and forth in latitude he could "TRICK" the young seed into “thinking” that a new growing season had begun and the just harvested wheat seeds would germinate, sprout, and grow without the dormant period formally associated with wheat cultivation. This not only sped up Borlaug's wheat breeding program, it also led to double cropping Mexican wheat. But if you can hypnotize a wheat seed into violating its basic genetic code is this trait really a result of gene expression??? I don't think so.

Scrapfe---Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.--Otto von Bismarck.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

Originally Posted by Solomon Parker

The funny thing is the sheer number of people who don't even take the time to click the link and discover that it is actually audio. It's amazing that a text based forum would have such an aversion to reading even when reading is not necessary.

No, always serious as you have been informed. Sorry, I guess you're still mad at me. Just trying to help.

Well, excuse me for not living up to your expectations. Perhaps you should havce mentioned that it was audio.

Just trying to help? Seemed like a dig to me.

Yeah, sometimes it takes me a while to get over something. I am petty that way.

Okay, I listened to his talk. So, what's your thing w/ Randy Oliver? If you have questions for him he can be reached thru bee-L. Or his website, I imagine. My buddy Peter Loring Borst knows him well and speaks to him often. Maybe you would like to talk to him.

Thanks for Posting the audio link. I'll have to listen to it again. I liked what he said about swarms not being the offspring of a colony, but the parent of what is left behind. I never thought of it that way.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

Originally Posted by David LaFerney

Except epigenetics doesn't work the same at all. It has more to do with changes in gene expression caused by environment. For example improvements in nutrition and natal/prenatal care have caused humans to become inherit-ably taller/larger in just a few generations. Not long ago Americans were the tallest people in the world on average, but now the Northern European people are (I think) - without any genetic changes.

But are we northern Europeans genetically destined to be be taller or could we with a few successive generations of malnutrition revert to those small suits of armor in the castles I like to visit? I don't buy that we are taller because of genetics if nutrition and prenatal/natal care are the causes.

On the thought that we could pass on traits that we aquired, this was a huge part of Darwin's theory of evolution. He was cautioned to quiet it down some by his contemporaries and hated that. In fact, if we really looked at most of what he said we might not put so much stock in the theory of evolution which is taught as if it were a law to our children. The whole argument about aquired traits was put to bed by a fellow who cut the tails off of successive generations of mice. Try as he might, he could generate a naturally occuring tail-less mouse.

Re: Epigenetics, Lamarckism, Mendelism, oh my!

Similar to one of the arguments against Ellen White, the 'prophet' of Seventh-Day Adventists. She claimed problems for daughters of women who wore corsets.

I see a better application toward children of parents with bad eating habits or environmental stressors. The genes are not necessarily changed, it's the expression of the genes.

Bees pass vast amounts of information through the use of pheromones and other chemicals. The theory surrounding 'heater bees' is supposed to involve the temperature of the broodnest during the larvae stage. The best example is the queen vs. worker naturally. They are genetically identical, but as Mr. Oliver says, under a microscope, they could be mistaken for different species.